Sharpening for Landscapes Question....

Canon_Shoe wrote in post #17680697
If you process a RAW file and then open it in Photoshop, are you still working with the actual RAW file itself or a copy of it?

To answer this very first question - a copy. Photoshop can't edit RAW files so an RGB image file is created from the RAW+ACR/LR adjustments.

Perfect! Exactly what I was looking for Dan

Dan Marchant wrote in post #17681510
To answer this very first question - a copy. Photoshop can't edit RAW files so an RGB image file is created from the RAW+ACR/LR adjustments.

To be more specific, I believe that if in LR or ACR you do an "Edit in Photoshop", what is "created" is not yet a file, but an in-memory RGB image. It is "uncompressed" and so in the Photoshop editor you can see the "size" of the image at the bottom of the screen, which is what you would get if you Save the image as an uncompressed tiff or PSD, and you would get "close" if you Save As a max-quality jpeg, although with that you'd still get some compression. Until you Save or Save As, the image remains in memory and is not yet a file.

If you are coming from Lightroom to PS, a save will create a tiff or psd, and that file will automatically be "joined" to the LR Library, appearing alongside the Raw original or, if you choose the option, "stacked" with the original. If you to a "Save As", the file won't automatically be in the LR catalog, you'd need to Import it if you wished!

Andrew, I could be wrong but I think you may be mixing up or are unclear on a couple of things from Mark's class. The sharpening you mentioned are two different types with different purposes. The first, in RAW, is capture sharpening. This sharpening is just to tighten-up the flat/dull RAW. The 2nd type of sharpening you mentioned with the high pass and USM is for when you are ready to print (and not before). The third, which you didn't mention, is creative sharpening, and is done after the RAW capture sharpening but before the print sharpening, and is for you to use on certain parts of the image, probably with some masking, to get the creative effect you are looking for.

You say that,

Canon_Shoe wrote in post #17680697
I find the sharpening in LR or ACR produces artifacts for me that are just frustrating. The settings you're supposed to use with this method in LR or ACR for sharpening are also very fine (Amount 35-55% Radius 0.5, Detail 100 Masking 0)".

If you are seeing artifacts in RAW/ACR then you are oversharpening in those areas. Masking should not be 0 for areas that need no sharpening, like large areas of sky or shadows. That could be why are you are seeing artifacts (?). The 35-55% is a guideline. Zoom into 100% and play with the amount until it looks good but isn't oversharpened.

If you have some areas that look nice and sharp at a certain amount of sharpening, but other areas need more sharpening, double process the RAW and sharpen for just those areas, and then blend those two images in PS. The key is to identify what areas need some sharpening, what areas don't, and if you can address that with the amount and masking in one raw file you are set. If not, double process and combine in PS. But you should not be seeing any artifacts at all at this stage and if you are you have either applied too much sharpening or have applied it to an area that doesn't need it.

From your initial post I'm not clear if you are doing the Print sharpening (high pass/USM) on all of your files and at what stage. When you say,

Canon_Shoe wrote in post #17680697
I was told to sharpen to a certain extent in the RAW conversion program (LR or ACR), then bring it into PS, Resize the image, apply high pass sharpening and then apply very fine Sharpening...

It sounds like you are doing print sharpening on all of your files right when you bring it into PS. If you are doing that before any other PS work, or for images you plan to post to the web, it is going to look terrible. The images should look quite crunchy after you do your print sharpening, so perhaps that is what you are seeing (?). Of course, if you are doing this on images intended for web display it will not look good.

I don't do full on print sharpening for all images, but I do capture sharpening on all of the images. What I'm getting is artifacts at the capture sharpening phase at even 25%. Perhaps I just need to mask it more? I was thinking my camera body has an issue, but then I open the file in Capture One Pro and it's really nice and clean at that stage, so maybe the issue is with ACR/LR? I'm probably just pixel peeping too much The files look cleaner when I sharpen in Photoshop without all of the capture sharpening, but I know I'm missing that extra detail at the RAW stage. Mark's class is awesome and the prints are fantastic usually

Very impressive work too by the way David!

Canon_Shoe wrote in post #17681714
I don't do full on print sharpening for all images, but I do capture sharpening on all of the images. What I'm getting is artifacts at the capture sharpening phase at even 25%. Perhaps I just need to mask it more? I was thinking my camera body has an issue, but then I open the file in Capture One Pro and it's really nice and clean at that stage, so maybe the issue is with ACR/LR? I'm probably just pixel peeping too much The files look cleaner when I sharpen in Photoshop without all of the capture sharpening, but I know I'm missing that extra detail at the RAW stage. Mark's class is awesome and the prints are fantastic usually

Thanks

Yeah, I'm not sure why you would be seeing artifacts at only 25% amount in LR but masking may help.

Two things you could do to help us help you:

1) Upload a Raw file to a "host" that we could download

2) Post a small (100%) crop from the image that, after LR/ACR sharpening, shows the artifacts you are seeing, and provide details of your Raw edits (especially sharpening, but other effects could also play a part -- for example, Clarity, if overdone)

Capture Sharpening is the least amount of sharpening needed to counteract the effect of the AA filter on the camera's sensor. It definitely should not be enough to produce artifacts. The way to test for it is to turn the sharpening on and off (toggle switch at top left of the Detail panel in LR) and slowly increase Amount while looking at the most sharpened section of the image at 1:1 (the whitest part of the mask). When you first see the image visibly sharpen between "off" and "on", that is Capture Sharpening as first formulated by Bruce Fraser a dozen years ago. Any more than that is no longer strictly Capture Sharpening.

Comparing LR/ACR and C1 is polntless because C1 defaults to much more sharpening than pure Capture Sharpening (and is not deconvolution) while LR/ACR defaults to something in the neighborhood of a general, good for all images, Capture Sharpening with 25% deconvolution, that is intended to be altered to suit the image and then followed later in the workflow by more sharpening.

Canon_Shoe wrote in post #17681714
The files look cleaner when I sharpen in Photoshop without all of the capture sharpening but I know I'm missing that extra detail at the RAW stage.

You shouldnt be....If you have a RAW in lightroom and send it as a full tiff to PS there will be absolutely no difference in the image at 100% if the TIFF is a full tiff and its sent to PS via ëdit in" .....The final TIFF has every bit of the finished/edited RAW detail the Lightroom RAW file has its just in a different format thats all......

I guess that I must be odd, I gernerally hate the look produced in LR by using any level of deconvolution sharpening. I usually set the detail slider to 0 and use only USM. I usually edit around 98% of my photographs only in LR so my sharpening settings in the LR Details pannel are usually covering both my input and creative sharpening needs. I usually have LR add apropriate output sharpening to the image on export. As it is not possIble to preview the LR output sharpening it is best to do some tests to come to the best settings for any particular output situation. I find it is quite consisten from image to image once you know what you like/need. LR's export and printing presets are useful for this. Its easy to have saved settings for just about any situation.

Alan

BigAl007 wrote in post #17682117
I guess that I must be odd, I gernerally hate the look produced in LR by using any level of deconvolution sharpening. I usually set the detail slider to 0 and use only USM. I usually edit around 98% of my photographs only in LR so my sharpening settings in the LR Details pannel are usually covering both my input and creative sharpening needs. I usually have LR add apropriate output sharpening to the image on export. As it is not possIble to preview the LR output sharpening it is best to do some tests to come to the best settings for any particular output situation. I find it is quite consisten from image to image once you know what you like/need. LR's export and printing presets are useful for this. Its easy to have saved settings for just about any situation.

Alan

agree 100% .....do all the work in Lightroom and then send to PS and sharpen( for printing) and print there.....

clipper_from_oz wrote in post #17682119
agree 100% .....do all the work in Lightroom and then send to PS and sharpen( for printing) and print there.....

I do all my proofing and printing from LR too. I much prefer the LR print module for printing, it has far more control than printing from PS. Actually if I have to edit in PS I will bring the image back to LR for proofing and final output.

Alan

Although I don't use LR (and maybe because I don't), I think I must be about the only person that prints from DPP after using PS. I don't know exactly why, but it just has an interface that seems more logical to me - using the 'Print with detailed settings'.

ejenner wrote in post #17684247
Although I don't use LR (and maybe because I don't), I think I must be about the only person that prints from DPP after using PS. I don't know exactly why, but it just has an interface that seems more logical to me - using the 'Print with detailed settings'.

actually you raise an interesting point here re DPP. I had someone actually recommend that I go back to DPP processing for my 5dsr files because they recon that DPP reads the 50 megapixel Canon RAW file better than Lightroom or Capture 1 as algorithms are optimised in DPP by Canon for Canon RAW. Only problem with that for me is DPP just doesnt have the features that either lightroom or Capture one have. Im going to actually go back to DPP shortly to test it out on DR, RAW Noise &Sharpness etc an...Although Im not holding my breath on DPP its worth having a revisit on a few things it may be able to better than lightroom that are more canon centric ( like RAW greyscale etc )